If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Welcome to Mac-Forums! Join us to comment and to customize your site experience! Members have access to different forum appearance options, and many more functions.

I heard a question on a design test that asked what max width you should use when designing sites. The answers were 800, 1024, 1280, and higher. My friend took the test and marked 1024 even though he said that question is a matter of opinion. I agree. They marked his answer wrong and said you should use 800. Most people use at least 1024 by 768 and most of the new popular sites stopped designing for 800x600 a couple years ago.

I say there is no right or wrong answer to that question. What do you think.

No, many developers and designers are still using the 800 X 600 measurement.
Granted, current trends show that users have been shifting to 1024 X 768 in the past couple of years, but it is still smarter to design with 800 X 600. There is still a large chunk of users out there using that resolution.

mac: a waterproof raincoat made of rubberized fabric
MAC: a data communication protocol sub-layer, also known as the Media Access Control
Mac: a brand name which covers several lines of personal computers designed, developed, and marketed by Apple Inc.

I have to disagree. All the big new sites, digg, youtube, myspace, ebay, the g4 site all stopped using 800x600. Only 14% of people are still using 800x600. I say some people just get left behind. Some people still don't have flash or javascript. We can't halt our advances because some people just won't get with it.

You can see that all it does is fill in the gaps you make when you make your browser larger. However, if you shrink your browser there is a finite point where the "shrinking" of the content will stop... somewhere around 800 px.

mac: a waterproof raincoat made of rubberized fabric
MAC: a data communication protocol sub-layer, also known as the Media Access Control
Mac: a brand name which covers several lines of personal computers designed, developed, and marketed by Apple Inc.

I'm not trying to start anything here but I don't get your drift. Non of the new tech/popular sites fit in 800x600. It doesn't matter if they don't fit by a little. They still don't fit. And most don't just miss the 800x600 res. Parts of whole sections are cut off.

I agree with DB that it still is a good idea if you want everyone to be able to enjoy your site to keep it at 800x600, but alas a good portion of the sites I visit daily are 1024x768 and if I go there with an old system set for 800x600 you have to scroll to see it all.

I try to keep the sites I design simple and as compatible with as many as I can.

I'm not meaning to sound argumentative, that wasn't my intent.
Yes, I understand that many sites are moving towards higher res sites, but they aren't all there yet. Many of them do shrink down, not all of them to exactly 800 px, but they do go under 900 px. They do allow users to reduce the resolution and still not miss out on content.
The point I am trying to get across is, there are still many users out there with lower resoltuions. There are still plenty of people who use lower res (even on a high res monitor) for eyesight problems or just plain easier readability. When you are designing a site, you should at least try to make it accessible to as many people as you can. Especially when 20% of your audience is on a lower or unknown resolution. Even W3 School's site is readable in 800 x 600 and they are the ones who pretty much came up with the whole "Web Standards" thing.

mac: a waterproof raincoat made of rubberized fabric
MAC: a data communication protocol sub-layer, also known as the Media Access Control
Mac: a brand name which covers several lines of personal computers designed, developed, and marketed by Apple Inc.

Another thing I forgot to mention... what resolution you design at has everything to do with who you are designing for.
Think about the type of person who visits "Tech Sites". Those sites generally have an audience that has the latest and greatest hardware, in step with current trends, and they are usually (though not always) younger. The higher res is more applicable in that context, as your target audience uses it/demands it/has the capability for it.
However, it is not the best idea to simply use a blanket res of 1024 or higher for every site you design. They key focus of any designer (no matter what you design, graphics, web, interactive media, print...etc) is your target audience. If your audience is a finite group or niche, then design with that group in mind. If your audience is broader, then you should design to the lowest ranking member of that audience. This way, your entire target is met and satisfied.

mac: a waterproof raincoat made of rubberized fabric
MAC: a data communication protocol sub-layer, also known as the Media Access Control
Mac: a brand name which covers several lines of personal computers designed, developed, and marketed by Apple Inc.

Agreed 1000% DB. I have friends with Radar eyes and they make their sights even higher than 1024. Drives me crazy even on a good monitor. Agreed also a lot of the Techie type sites set up their pages for higher res. I personally here on any newer system have no problems with 1024x768 but some of my older systems sure do and I do like to use them from time to time. Then there are the people with smaller and older monitors and they can not afford anything else. I feel for them also.